The background description includes information that can be useful in understanding the present invention. It is not an admission that any of the information provided herein is prior art or relevant to the presently claimed invention, or that any publication specifically or implicitly referenced is prior art.
Some flexible back support braces that users could comfortably wear for everyday general uses are known. However, such braces are largely ineffective in relieving lower back pain as they generally do not improve trunk stability to the extent inelastic braces do. Unfortunately, inelastic braces (e.g., braces having rigid edges that dig into the wearer's body or bulky, rigid plastic components) can be very restrictive for wearers, especially for those that require relief when working, exercising or engaging in other physical activities where mobility is beneficial. For this and various other reasons, users of elastic braces have found it difficult to transition to the more supportive inelastic braces.
While some efforts have been made to produce a brace that provides benefits of both flexible and inelastic braces, such efforts appear to focus primarily or solely on the breathability of base materials rather than on any of the other benefits of flexible or elastic base materials. Thus, these previous efforts fail to provide many of the desired benefits of flexible and inelastic braces.
For example, US 2009/0306570 to Bauerfeind teaches a tubular compression bandage that is inelastic laterally to the longitudinal direction and elastic in the longitudinal direction. More specifically, Bauerfeind's bandage is described as being custom made based on measurements of a user's leg. The bandage “fits snugly on a limb over the entirely length of the bandage,” and “does not form any particularly tightly confined sites of constrictions.”
As another example, Bauerfeind's SacroLoc® lower back brace includes segments that use a combination of elastic and non-elastic knit such that the brace can be stretched in the up-down direction, but appears to be inelastic in the right-left along the entire height of the segments. Because Bauerfeind's bandages and braces appear to be designed to be inelastic in the right-left direction over the entire height of the bandage or brace segments (e.g., to provide an even pressure), they largely eliminate the benefits of an elastic brace.
Thus, there is still a need in the art for improved braces and other wearable objects that incorporate various benefits of inelastic braces and elastic braces.